Deregulation Bill — Clause 17 — Specific Authorisation of Insolvency Practitioners to Work With Companies or Individuals — 23 Jun 2014 at 21:00
John Penrose MP, Weston-Super-Mare voted to allow insolvency practitioners to be authorised to deal with either just individuals, or just companies, rather than requiring them to be authorised to deal with all cases.
The majority of MPs voted in favour of allowing insolvency practitioners to be authorised to deal with either just individuals, or just companies, rather than requiring them to be authorised to deal with all cases.
MPs were considering the Deregulation Bill. The amendment rejected in this vote was:
- Amendment 84, page 11, line 18, leave out clause 17
- Currently, individuals who are authorised to act as an insolvency practitioner are authorised in relation to all categories of appointment. Under the new regime, a person may be authorised to act only in relation to companies or only in relation to individuals. The new regime will increase accessibility to the insolvency practitioner profession and improve competition. It will also reduce the cost of training and ongoing regulation for applicants who wish to specialise.
-  Parliament's webpage on the Deregulation Bill
-  Clause 17 of the Deregulation Bill to which the amendment relates
-  Explanatory notes to the Deregulation Bill
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||232 (+1 tell)||0||0||76.4%|
|Lab||0||203 (+2 tell)||0||79.5%|
|LDem||41 (+1 tell)||0||0||75.0%|